My Prayer For America

Three weeks ago, I started studying the Book of Romans with a group of guys from my church. As we examined the beginning chapter of the ancient letter, I saw remarkable parallels between 1st-century Rome and modern-day America. Take a look at a small passage of Paul’s epistle:

The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
(Romans 1:18-25)

Perhaps you don’t see the similarities. Perhaps you don’t see the prevalence of racial tension, political and professional corruption, or rampant selfishness and hardheartedness. Or perhaps things like abortion, proliferation of the LGBT agenda, and a general turning away from God don’t bother you. Perhaps you don’t think of America when you read verse 32: “Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.” (Emphasis added) If not, this post will likely ring hollow.

But perhaps, like me, you are grieved. Perhaps, like me, you fear that God will bring (or has already begun bringing) his wrath upon America. Perhaps, like me, you see America when you read that “God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done.” (Romans 1:28) Perhaps, like me, you desperately hope that America will repent, reverse course, and return to the values that made us a great nation to begin with. If so, I urge you to join me in fervent prayer.

I give the following as an example, not with the idea that this is what you should pray, but because it is the cry of my heart. If it is yours, please echo it. Scripture tells us that “the prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective.” (James 5:16) Jesus told his disciples “You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it” and “my Father will give you whatever you ask in my name.” (John 14:14, 16:23, emphasis added) With belief that these requests are “in [his] name”—and submitting to his will if not—will you join me in offering the following supplication to God?

Recognizing that we have absolutely no standing to petition for Your mercy, particularly in light of the way we as a nation have turned away from You, we beg for mercy nonetheless. As Abraham stood over Sodom and pleaded with You to spare the city if as few as ten righteous persons could be found in it, we plead on behalf of the righteous people in our nation. Would You relent from bringing Your wrath upon us? Would You not give us over and withdraw from us, but would You, as the old hymn states, “mend [our] ev’ry flaw, confirm [our] soul in self-control, [our] liberty in law” and would You “[our] gold refine, till all success be nobleness, and ev’ry gain divine!” Would You please give us one more chance?

Would You continue to reveal Yourself to us? Convict us of sin. Turn our hearts toward repentance. Do not merely refine our laws or political systems; do not change our clothes, but change our hearts. Would You raise up godly men and women who will live out the glorious gospel of Jesus Christ in every aspect of their lives? Would You give us one more chance and enable us by the power of the Holy Spirit to make the most of that chance, lest we find ourselves uttering this request again?

Particularly as we engage in political elections, we recognize that no President, no Congress, no rules or laws of men can change the heart of man. But we know that “the authorities that exist have been established by God.” (Romans 13:1) We know that godly men and women in positions of influence can be agents of change. Would You, therefore, call and raise up such men and women, inspiring them to run for office—local, state, and federal? Would You imbue those in office and those running for office with biblical values, integrity, humility, and the courage of their convictions? Would You “make their paths straight” (Proverbs 11:5) as they seek to serve You?

Would You give people, particularly Christians, a yearning for truth, for justice, for righteousness? Would you impress upon them the importance of biblical values? Would You inspire them to strive to restore those American ideals that are true, just, and righteous and to repair and replace those that aren’t? Would You give people, particularly Christians, wisdom and discernment to sort through lies and deception, bluster and rhetoric, so they can determine which candidates are worthy of their support? Would You give them diligence to vote, to advocate, and to engage their friends and families, lovingly and graciously, on behalf of those candidates and the values they uphold?

In II Chronicles 7:14, we read that “if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.” Your Word is replete with examples of Your unwarranted mercy and boundless grace. Would You call your people—Would You call me!—to humility, prayer, pursuit of you, and repentance, and would You hear our prayer, forgive our sin, and heal our nation? At times, it seems it is too late. At times, it seems there is no way forward. At times, we feel like giving up. Revive us with endurance, an iron will, the fortitude to continue. Remind us that “with God all things are possible.” (Matthew 19:26) Reveal Your power to do “immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine” (Ephesians 3:20) not just in our lives, but in our elections, our government, and our country at large.

Almighty God, would You please continue to bless the United States of America? Would You restore her, in the words of President Reagan, to “a shining city upon a hill,” that provides a beacon of freedom to the world? Would that beacon not be merely political freedom, but spiritual freedom? Would You use this nation as wellspring for the gospel, use its freedom as a wide, unchecked channel through which the good news of Jesus Christ can reach the world? And would You use me as You see fit in this process?

A Supreme Idea

More and more, the Supreme Court of the United States (henceforth referred to as SCOTUS) is once again prominent in the news. As if their handing down controversial decisions regarding the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), gay marriage, and climate change in recent months and the pending presidential election weren’t driving the coverage enough, the death last Saturday of Justice Antonin Scalia has SCOTUS at the center of everyone’s attention. Or, I should say, the political debate back and forth about Justice Scalia’s replacement does.

Now, this is not another post on why the Senate should filibuster Obama so much as opening his mouth about SCOTUS, nor is it a directive for the Senate to do its job, get out of the way, and let the President appoint a replacement ASAP. Those columns, blogs, and Facebook and Twitter posts are prevalent enough. Rather, I want to take this opportunity to discuss SCOTUS on a larger scale.

First, let me pause and ask all of us to step back for a minute. Justice Scalia left behind a wife and nine children. He spent thirty years on the bench, advocating not for his political ideology but for constitutional law. Lost in conspiracy theories about his death, calls for his replacement, calls to block his replacement, and a host of demagoguery is the fact that the Scalia family just lost a husband and father and America just lost a great man. Sadly, everything gets politicized immediately these days, and one side blames the other and insists they’re simply being political themselves to get ahead of the spin. I’m guilty of it as well. But perhaps next time, we could at least let the body get cold before we start firing shots across the bow?

SCOTUS was established by Article III, Section I of the Constitution, which states: “The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.” The parameters of SCOTUS are somewhat vague, and I think now is a good time to put forth suggestions on a few changes to the court. Admittedly, I am not a constitutional lawyer (but Ann Coulter is, so . . .) and my blog will have no influence on changing SCOTUS. Well, maybe it will. Maybe it will start a grassroots movement. Maybe someone will share this blog on Facebook and someone else will share that Facebook post and a Congressman will see it and start drafting the Twenty-Eighth Amendment to the Constitution. If so, here’s what I hope it enumerates:

1) SCOTUS should consist of 15 justices, not nine, and should require a two-thirds majority to reach any consensus or decision. (Therein failing, the previous standard remains in place.) As it is right now, a simple majority (five of nine justices) can change the law. In 1973, five justices made Roe v. Wade law, legalizing abortion. Think about that. If you’re pro-life, that means five (5!) people made it legal to kill almost 60 million babies. If you’re pro-choice, you’re happy with the ruling of five justices. But what if the shoe is on the other foot? What if five (just 5) justices ruled against same-sex marriage and made it illegal in all 50 states? What if five justices struck down the Affordable Care Act? Or ruled that First Amendment privileges didn’t extend to, say, blogs or Facebook posts? Or said that guns were illegal for private citizens to own for purposes of self-defense, or conversely removed any and all bans, limits, wait periods, or background checks on weapon purchases? Extreme situations, perhaps. But the point is, five people have nearly unlimited power. Increasing the number of justices and requiring a two-thirds majority would double the number of people necessary to wield such influence. The chances of corruption (I have the utmost respect for SCOTUS, but the justices are human, and power corrupts) or political bias weighing in on a decision, as opposed to strict Constitutional interpretation, would be significantly lessened.

2) Justices should be appointed, not for life, but for a fixed period of time. As we’ve seen with politicians, if justices are running for reelection, the very real and present danger exists of them ruling and judging to earn favor and votes. Political expediency will replace diligent jurisprudence. On the other hand, if a justice knows that they are untouchable, they have no accountability. They can go completely off the rails and, short of impeachment (which has never happened), no one can do anything about it. Increasing the number of justices and requiring a stronger majority will mitigate a “lone-wolf” justice, but so too would instituting fixed terms. I recommend 15 or 20 years.

3) Appointments should be staggered, such that one president (say, an arch-conservative) doesn’t get to nominate and appoint two or three justices while his successor (say, a staunch liberal) doesn’t get to appoint any. Or vice versa. With fixed terms and staggered appointments, and with exceptions of death or other irregular exceptions, each president will nominate the same number of justices per four-year term. As always, the people will have their say in voting for president and voting for senators that get to “Advise and Consent” on the president’s nomination.

Now, I would expect a Constitutional Amendment do be worded much loftier than my thrown-together blog post, with random words capitalized and misspelled, per the original document (yes, I’m just being cheeky now). Perhaps there are some other parameters that should be added to the three above. Perhaps I’ve overlooked some reason why these three wouldn’t be prudent. So I pitch it to you, the American people. What do you think? Good ideas? Bad ideas? A little of each? Let me know your thoughts and, particularly if you agree, let your elected representative know them as well!

Vetting the Voting

I love America, the Constitution, and the democratic process. But I have to say, the way we conduct elections in this country is kind of stupid.

Consider that tonight we start the process of determining the next leader of the free world. Sort of a big deal, right? So why then is all of the focus on one state? Why aren’t all Americans going out to vote at once? Instead, for months, every candidate with a pulse (and Bernie Sanders too) has been visiting every church, café, coffee shop, co-op, and chicken coop in the state to campaign, pander, and grovel for votes. Nothing against the fine people of Iowa, but why are they given preferential treatment? Why do candidates spend more time in the Hawkeye State and with its 3.1 million people than with the populations of Texas, Florida, and half the South combined? Residents in those states get a drive-by or whistle-stop wave, whereas every single person in Iowa has met each candidate a dozen times and had them over for coffee or Sunday brunch.

After Iowa, everyone flocks to New Hampshire (as opposed to say, Rhode Island or Connecticut). This one-state-at-a-time procedure continues for a month until thirteen states cast ballots on Super Tuesday (March 1). A few more vote later that week, another five the week after. And so on and so forth. Seriously? The method of voting isn’t even standard. Some states vote in primaries. In Iowa, they “caucus.” South Carolina has different days set aside for the Republican and Democrat tickets. In Nevada, they tabulate the votes and award candidates a corresponding number of ping-pong balls for a lotto-style “election” held on the Las Vegas Strip at midnight. (Okay, I made that one up, but you never know.)

Is it any wonder only one-third of the population votes in general elections? I mean, we’re one step above drunk guys in a bar throwing darts at candidates’ faces or a blindfolded chimp picking between painted bananas. How did this system ever get created? Was another country already employing the eeny-meeny-miny-mo method? Did putting all the candidates’ names on a wheel and giving it a big spin seem too arbitrary? Granted, we’re a far sight better than a place like North Korea—where Supreme Leader Kim Jung-Dingbat gets unanimously re-elected by 10 billion North Koreans each year—but this is ridiculous.

Please, there has to be a bored ninth-term congressman out there with nothing to do but start drafting a 28th Amendment to the Constitution that would make this entire process, oh, I don’t know, sane! I’ve even come up with a hashtag to get it off the ground: #SameWaySameDay. And of course, to be fair, Iowa’s representatives will get to vote on it—two months after all the other states.

In the meantime, if there’s any folks from Iowa or New Hampshire reading this, shoot me a message. I’d like to give you my two cents’ worth so that I can have some small say in this whole deal. As it is, I don’t get to vote until April 5, by which time a majority of states will have voted and the next President of the United States may have already been nominated. I don’t know what other recourse I have, except maybe to appear out of a cornfield with a campaign sign and hope they don’t check my ID. But somehow, that doesn’t quite seem fair.

Categories

Author

I'm a thinker. For better or worse, my mind is always running. As a writer, I also love the method of communication. I think there's an artistry to it. This blog is my way of giving my constant thinking a place to express itself artistically.